.jpg) |
On the Assisted Suicide Bill Debate coming up in the UK on Friday November 15, 2024
There is a lot of muddled thinking about assisted suicide and this is because the basic principles are not addressed and instead, we hear more about the emotional and safeguarding issues.
I think the basic principle is: are you in favour of people killing themselves? If the answer is ‘YES’ then all you have to do is ensure that the new law is bristling with rules to prevent the obvious abuses. If your answer is ‘NO’ then obviously this extends to any form of suicide, whether assisted or not.
The confusion comes when public figures claim to be against the assisted suicide bill on the grounds that there may be abuses. If this is their position then they’re really saying: “but for the unresolved issues of abuses, I am in favour of people killing themselves.” In order to cover this objection, the sponsors of the bill have produced what look like bomb-proof safeguards in that assisted suicide can only happen with the consent of 2 doctors and a High Court Judge. As no one seems to be against suicide in principle then it looks as though these safeguards will ensure that the bill will become law.
These safeguards won’t last very long, of course. They never do. Leaving decisions such as these in the hands of doctors is, well, daft. What kind of doctor? A GP? An overworked hospital registrar who hasn’t slept for 36 hours? God help us! (Joke: what’s the difference between God and a doctor? Answer: God doesn’t think he’s a doctor.)
And Judges? As if these ladies and gentlemen hadn’t enough to do already, such as casting aged housewives into prison for making hasty and ill-judged statements on ‘X’. Leaving these decisions ultimately in the hands of doctors and lawyers not only confers the power of life and death on them, reminding us of Doctor Crippen and Judge Jeffreys, but also will cause a huge stack of appeal court cases which, if successful, will provide a layer of common law which may well neutralise the initial safeguards. Some judge might acquire a reputation for being ‘soft’ and humane. Another may be regarded as hard-line, the ‘hanging judge.’ I cannot believe that any judge would take on such a responsibility.
So, why can’t we kill ourselves? After all, we’re not harming other people, and our own interests must come before the selfish feelings of grieving friends and relatives. Thus, the most common arguments in favour of suicide are the emotional ones based largely on anecdotal evidence. If a patient in hospital is lying in bed, surrounded by loving relatives, and suffering unendurable pain, then surely it is only kind to assist granny in her passing?
This is the picture painted for us over the airwaves by Mrs Esther Rantzen. She lathers on the pathos so much that we feel heartless in not acceding to granny’s heartfelt request to help her to end it all. Esther is under a misapprehension. Loving families are actually a thing of the past. Many old people die alone, un-mourned and even uncared-for. Also, terminally ill people do not give up hope that easily and have good days as well as bad days. In any case, nowadays, with the widespread availability of palliative care most pain can be treated, and it is rare for people to die in agony.
Another argument which crops up, and is made much of, is the desire to be spared the indignities associated with serious illness. An example is those who suffer from motor neurone disease where the brain can function normally and yet the body is subjected to a creeping paralysis. Tragic though this condition is, the feeling of indignity may come and go and is often very subjective, as the carer my be a close relative who is only too happy to care for the patient, whatever indignities he suffers. Alternatively, the carer may be highly trained so that humiliating experiences are kept to a minimum.
What many terminally ill people suffer from, though, is mental anguish connected with the realisation of approaching death, and I fail to see how assisted suicide can help with that.
On a purely natural level, assuming that God doesn’t exist, the official approval of self-destruction is another step in the descent of our civilisation towards its doom. Next comes the gradual relaxation of the safeguards and the watering down of the principle of consent. Supposing granny cannot physically give her consent? In that case we could appoint someone else to speak for her like an advocate or, rather, a devil’s advocate. Should we perhaps shut granny in a quiet room with a bottle of vodka and a revolver?
Suicide is one of those subjects where the sanctity of human life is the sole issue, if God exists, that is. Without God everything is relativised and largely emotional. The atheists and agnostics in our House of Commons see everything in terms of “pure human reason,” emotion and utilitarianism, and they will generate a lot of heat, but little light. All the arguments, for and against, will be pointless because most MPs have already decided how to vote. Like most debates in the chamber, it will be the exchange of useless debating points which will decide the fate of this bill, and at no time will the MPs seek the truth of the matter. This is why the forthcoming bill before parliament will probably become law as we catch up with other countries who have allowed it for some years now. In Belgium, assisted suicide is ranked fifth as a cause of death.
Turning to the supernatural side of the debate, which is hardly ever investigated, suicide is a mortal sin which is so serious that the deceased is damned, forbidden a Christian burial, and must be buried on un-consecrated ground. God makes allowances for the state of mind of the suicide, but we are not allowed to speculate. Assisted suicide is murder, another mortal sin crying out to heaven for vengeance.
Catholic doctors and Catholic judges will be placed in an impossible position in this and must be given the opportunity to opt out of these decisions. God protects the sanctity of human life by enshrining it in the natural law. This ensures that you do not have to be a Catholic to be aware of it. Anyone who disregards the sanctity of human life has to be evil or morally insane, in common with Hitler, Pol Pot, and others like them.
The debate on the legalising of abortion in the 1960s has really paved the way for the legalising of assisted suicide, and this is because we have become accustomed to playing God, having authority over birth. We will soon have authority over death. There are now over 200,000 abortions a year in the United Kingdom and that all started with strict safeguards against the abuse of the system and trying to prevent abortion on demand. Abortion on demand is now a reality as the numbers increase annually and this will probably be the same for assisted dying. This is what happens when we rely on human law rather than divine law.
Joseph Bevan
November 14, 2024
Joseph Bevan has just published his memoirs, Two Families: A Memoir of English Life During and After the Council (Os Justi Press, 2024), available from the publisher or from Amazon.
